Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hymenarcys nervosa (Say, 1831a) New state record: Alabama: Baldwin Co.: I-65 at Hwy 225, 14-IV-1984, D. A. Rider (1♂ DAR). Cullman Co.: 1 m. S Hwy 278 on I-65, 18-V-1983, D. A. Rider (1♂ 1♀ DAR). Lee Co.: 0.3 m S Co. 26, 0.1 m. W US 29, 11-VI-1982, D. A. Rider (1♀ DAR); 8-I-1983, D. A. Rider (1♀ DAR). Macon Co.: I-85 at Hwy 81, 16-IV-1984, D. A. Rider (1♂ 1♀ DAR); Overlook Point on Monte Sano, 19-VIII-1951, I. J. Cantrall, det. R. F. Hussey 1952 (1♀ UMMZ); 5.1 m. E Shorter on I-85, 25-V-1983, D. A. Rider (1♂ DAR). Tuscaloosa Co.: University, 1935, A. F. Archer (1♀ UMMZ). Distribution: Canada: QC. United States: AL, AR, CT (Britton 1920, O’Donnell & Schaefer 2012), DC, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS (Crevecoeur 1905, Tucker 1907, Packauskas 2012), KY, LA (McPherson et al. 1982), MA, MD, MI, MO, MS (Ashmead 1895), NC, NE (Zimmer 1912, Van Duzee 1917), NJ, NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD (Parshley 1922), TN (Meyer 1937), TX, VA. (Mexico) Comments: Although this species was recorded from Alabama in a thesis (Simons 1969), the above listed records represent the first known published records for Alabama. Uhler (1876) listed this species from ‘Dakota’. Although Rider (2012) gave evidence that most of Uhler’s ‘Dakota’ records probably came from North Dakota, he did not examine any specimens of this species from North Dakota; this record needs confirmation. According to Moore (1950), the record from Quebec (credited to Van Duzee) was doubtful, but several other workers (Provancher 1885, Walley 1929, Maw et al. 2000) have listed this species from Quebec.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.012 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".